appendix e health risk assessment technical report...5750 hollywood boulevard project health risk...

APPENDIX E – HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT TECHNICAL REPORT

HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT TECHNICAL REPORT

FortheProposed5750HollywoodBoulevardProject5732‐5766HollywoodBoulevard

LosAngeles,CA

Preparedfor:

5750 HOLLYWOOD BOULEVARD, LLC 9663SantaMonicaBoulevard

Suite974BeverlyHills,CA90210

Preparedby:

PCRSERVICESCORPORATION201SantaMonicaBoulevard,Suite500

SantaMonica,CA90401TEL310.451.4488FAX310.451.5279

October2015

5750HollywoodBoulevardProject HealthRiskAssessmentTechnicalReportPCRServicesCorporation

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

Acronym Description

Basin SouthCoastAirBasin

CARB CaliforniaAirResourcesBoard

CEQA CaliforniaEnvironmentalQualityAct

City CityofLosAngeles

CPF CancerPotencyFactor

DPM dieselexhaustparticulatematter

HARP HotspotsAnalysisandReportingProgram

HRA HealthRiskAssessment

MATESIV MultipleAirToxicsExposureStudy,May2015

SCAQMD SouthCoastAirQualityManagementDistrictTAC toxicaircontaminants

USEPA UnitedStatesEnvironmentalProtectionAgency

5750HollywoodBoulevardProject HealthRiskAssessmentTechnicalReportPCRServicesCorporation i

Table of Contents

Page

ACRONYMSANDABBREVIATIONS....................................................................................................................................1

EXECUTIVESUMMARY.....................................................................................................................................................ES‐1

1.0INTRODUCTION...............................................................................................................................................................1 1.1 ProjectDescription...............................................................................................................................................................1 1.2 ExistingAirQualityConditions.......................................................................................................................................1

2.0REGULATIONSANDSIGNIFICANCETHRESHOLDS...............................................................................................5 2.1 RegulatorySetting................................................................................................................................................................5

3.0METHODOLOGY...............................................................................................................................................................7 3.1 SourceIdentification(HollywoodFreeway).............................................................................................................7 3.2 EmissionsCalculations(HollywoodFreeway).........................................................................................................7 3.3 DispersionModeling(HollywoodFreeway)..............................................................................................................8 3.4 CancerRiskandHealthRiskCalculations(HollywoodFreeway)....................................................................8

4.0IMPACTANALYSIS........................................................................................................................................................13

5.0SUMMARYOFRESULTS..............................................................................................................................................15

APPENDICES

APPENDIXA:HEALTHRISKASSESSMENTWORKSHEETSANDOUTPUTFILES

List of Figures

Figure Page

ES‐1 VicinityLocationMap..................................................................................................................................................ES‐3 1 SiteAerialPhotograph.......................................................................................................................................................3 2 Source‐ReceptorDiagram.................................................................................................................................................9

List of Tables

Table Page

ES‐1 MaximumCancerRiskImpactforOn‐siteSensitiveReceptors.................................................................ES‐1 1 FreewayandRampTrafficVolumes.............................................................................................................................7 2 OEHHARecommendedResidentialDailyBreathingRatesforPointEstimateDose

Calculations(L/kgbodyweight)..............................................................................................................................11 3 OEHHARecommendationsforFractionofTimeatHome(FAH)forEvaluatingResidential

CancerRisk..........................................................................................................................................................................12 4 SummaryofCarcinogenicRisksforOn‐siteSensitiveReceptors.................................................................13

5750HollywoodBoulevardProject HealthRiskAssessmentTechnicalReportPCRServicesCorporation ES‐1

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The purpose of this Health Risk Assessment Technical Report is to assess and discuss the impacts ofpotentialtoxicaircontaminantsthatmayimpacton‐siteresidentsatthe5750HollywoodBoulevardProject.5750HollywoodBoulevard,LLC,theApplicant,proposesamixed‐usedevelopmentona1.10‐acrepropertyat5732‐5766HollywoodBoulevard(theProjectSiteorSite)intheHollywoodcommunityoftheCityofLosAngeles (the Project). The applicant has retained PCR Services Corporation (PCR) to conduct acomprehensive Health Risk Assessment for the proposed Project. In accordance with the requirementsundertheCaliforniaEnvironmentalQualityAct(CEQA),thisTechnicalReportprovidesanestimateofhealthimpactstoon‐sitefutureresidentsduetoemissionsfromthenearby101Freeway.

TheProjectSiteshowninFigureES‐1,VicinityLocationMap,islocatedintheHollywoodcommunityoftheCity of LosAngeles. The applicant proposes to developnew structures for the Site. This includes anewmulti‐family complex, underground parking structure, and street‐level retail. The buildings and parkingstructures will be spread throughout the site and are not adjacent to each other. The Project includesexcavationforsubterraneanparking,andconstructionofbuildings.

TheHealth Risk Assessment includes three separate components: 1) Emissions inventory; 2)DispersionModeling; and3)HealthRiskCalculations. Emissions from the101Freewaywerecalculatedusing trafficdata obtained from the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Performance MeasurementSystem (PeMS) database and emission factors from the California Air Resources Board (CARB) EMFACmodel. Dispersion modeling was performed using the US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA)AERMODmodel with meteorological data from the closest South Coast Air Quality Management District(SCAQMD)monitoringstation. Sensitivereceptorsusedformodelingwereplacedatthelocationof futureresidential buildings. Health risk calculations were performed using the CARB Hotspots Analysis andReportingProgram(HARP),version2.

As shown inTableES‐1,MaximumCancerRiskImpactforOn‐siteSensitiveReceptors, below, cancer riskatthe maximum impacted receptor was below the SCAQMD significance threshold of 10 in one million.Therefore, impacts to on‐site receptors were less than significant and no mitigation measures werenecessary.

Table ES‐1

Maximum Cancer Risk Impact for On‐site Sensitive Receptors

Risk Scenario Carcinogenic Risk Per One Million*

MaximumExposedIndividual(MEI)(closesttofreeway)

6.8

SCAQMDSignificanceThreshold 10ExceedThreshold? No

Source:PCRServicesCorporation,2015

Executive Summary October 2015

5750HollywoodBoulevardProject AirQualityTechnicalReportPCRServicesCorporation ES‐2

Thispageintentionallyblank.

£¤101

Hollywood Boulevard

PROJECT SITE

FIGURE

Source: ESRI Street Map, 2009; PCR Services Corporation, 2015.

0 500 1,000 Feet

5750 Hollywood Boulevard Project

Regional Vicinity Mapo ES-1

^PROJECT

SITE£¤101

Executive Summary October 2015



5750HollywoodBoulevardProject HealthRiskAssessmentTechnicalReportPCRServicesCorporation 1

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

TheProject Site is immediatelyborderedbyHollywoodBoulevard to thenorth, an alley to the south, thefour‐storyHollywoodViewTowersmixed‐useresidentialandretaildevelopmenttotheeast,andtheSaab&RaffiautomotiverepairshopandHollywoodFreeway(US101)embankmentandnorthboundexitramptothewest,asshownintheaerialphotographpresentedinFigure1,SiteAerialPhotograph.Landusestothenorth,acrossHollywoodBoulevard,includetheHollywoodSeventh‐DayAdventistChurch,LosAngelesFireDepartment Station No. 82, a single‐story commercial corner development with neighborhood‐servingcommercialuses,andaPierOneretailstore.Landusestothesouth,acrossthealleyfromtheProjectSite,consist ofmulti‐family apartment buildings and single‐family residences. Landuses to the east andwestalongHollywoodBoulevardarepredominantlycommercialwithsomemulti‐familyresidentialdevelopment.

TheProjectSite isgenerally flat,withagentleslopeof less than twopercent to thesouthandanaverageelevationofapproximately390feetabovemeansealevel.TheProjectSitecurrentlycontainstwobuildings,5766HollywoodBoulevardand5750HollywoodBoulevard,separatedbyasurfaceparkinglot.Theparkinglot is accessed via twodriveways onHollywoodBoulevard. 5766HollywoodBoulevard consists of a one‐story brick building constructed in 1924 and occupying the western end of the Project Site. The 8,750‐square‐foot building, designed by the architectural firm of Morgan, Walls & Clements as an automobileshowroom,wasmostrecentlyusedbytheneighboringSaab&Raffiautomotiverepairshopinconjunctionwiththeiroperationsontheadjoiningparceltothewestuntilearly2014,whenthebuildingwasvacated.

The Project would redevelop the Site with a seven‐story mixed‐use building housing 161 residentialdwellings, including five live/work or shopkeeper units and 14 affordable housing units, totalingapproximately 168,956 square feet.1,2 A total of 271automobile parking spaces and 96bicycle parkingspaceswouldbeprovidedwithintwosubterraneanparkinglevelsandoneat‐gradelevel. DevelopmentoftheProjectwouldinvolvedemolitionofthetwoon‐sitebuildingsandsurfaceparkinglot.

The overall project will include total demolition of 23,528 GSF of existing buildings and the addition of168,956GSFofnewBuildingsplus271parkingspaces.

1.2 EXISTING AIR QUALITY CONDITIONS

TheSCAQMDhasreleasedadraftfinalBasin‐wideairtoxicsstudy(MATESIV,MultipleAirToxicsExposureStudy,May2015). TheMATESIVStudyrepresentsoneof themostcomprehensiveair toxicsstudieseverconducted in an urban environment. The Study was aimed at estimating the cancer risk from toxic airemissionsthroughouttheBasinbyconductingacomprehensivemonitoringprogram,anupdatedemissionsinventoryoftoxicaircontaminants,andamodelingefforttofullycharacterizehealthrisksforthoselivinginthe Basin. The Study concluded that the average carcinogenic risk from air pollution in the Basin is1 Thisarea is themaximumgross floorarea forFARpurposes,calculated inaccordancewithLosAngelesMunicipalCode (LAMC)

Section 12.03, and excludes basement storage, vertical circulation including stairways and elevator shafts, rooms housingmechanicalequipment,parkingandassociatedcirculation,service/mechanicalequipment,lightcourtsandareas“opentobelow”inthemainlobbyandresidentialdwellingmezzanines.

2 Themaximum gross floor area for FAR purposes includes a by‐right density bonus of 35percent over the otherwise allowablemaximumdensitypermittedinaccordancewithLAMCSection12.22.A.25fordesignating11percent(14units)ofthebasepermittedunitsforVeryLowIncomehouseholds.

1.0 Introduction October 2015


approximately420inonemillion.Mobilesources(e.g.,cars,trucks,trains,ships,aircraft,etc.)representthegreatest contributors. Approximately 75 percent of the risk is attributed to diesel particulate emissions,approximately20percenttoothertoxicsassociatedwithmobilesources(includingbenzene,butadiene,andformaldehyde), and approximately 5 percent of all carcinogenic risk is attributed to stationary sources(whichincludeindustriesandothercertainbusinesses,suchasdrycleanersandchromeplatingoperations).

As part of theMATES IV study, the SCAQMDhas prepared a series ofmaps that show regional trends inestimatedoutdoorinhalationcancerriskfromtoxicemissions,aspartofanongoingefforttoprovideinsightinto relative risks. The maps’ estimates represent the number of potential cancers per million peopleassociatedwitha lifetimeofbreathingair toxics (24hoursperdayoutdoors for70years) inpartsof thearea.TheMATESIVwebinteractivemapisthemostrecentlyavailablemaptorepresentexistingconditionsneartheProjectarea. Theestimatedcancerriskisapproximately471cancerspermillion.3Generally,theriskfromairtoxicsislowernearthecoastline;increasinginland,withhigherrisksconcentratednearlargedieselsources(e.g.,freeways,airports,andports).

3 South Coast Air Quality Management District, Multiple Air Toxics Exposure Study Iv – Model Estimated Cancer Risk, (2015),

http://www3.aqmd.gov/webappl/OI.Web/OI.aspx?jurisdictionID=AQMD.gov&shareID=73f55d6b‐82cc‐4c41‐b779‐4c48c9a8b15b.AccessedJune23,2015.

£¤101

Hollywood Boulevard

N W

ilton

Place

Carlton Way

Taft

Aven

ue

N Va

n Ne

ss A

venu

e

Taft

Aven

ue

FIGURE

Source: USDA FSA, 2014 (Aerial); PCR Services Corporation, 2015.

0 75 150 Feet

5750 Hollywood Boulevard Project

Site Aerial Photographo 1

Project Boundary

1.0 Introduction October 2015




2.0 REGULATIONS AND SIGNIFICANCE THRESHOLDS

2.1 REGULATORY SETTING

Certainairpollutantshavebeenrecognizedtocausenotablehealthproblemsandconsequentialdamagetothe environment either directly or in reaction with other pollutants, due to their presence in elevatedconcentrationsintheatmosphere.Suchpollutantshavebeenidentifiedandregulatedaspartoftheoverallendeavor to prevent further deterioration and facilitate improvement in air quality. The SCAQMDperiodicallyassesseslevelsoftoxicaircontaminants(TACs)intheAirBasin.ATACisdefinedbyCaliforniaHealthandSafetyCodeSection39655:

“Toxicaircontaminant”meansanairpollutantwhichmaycauseorcontributetoanincreaseinmortalityorinseriousillness,orwhichmayposeapresentorpotentialhazardtohumanhealth.Asubstancethatislistedasahazardousairpollutantpursuanttosubsection(b)ofSection112ofthefederalact(42U.S.C.Sec.7412(b))isatoxicaircontaminant.

TACsrefertoadiversegroupofairpollutantsthatarecapableofcausingchronic(i.e.,oflongduration)andacute (i.e., severe but of shortduration) adverse effects onhumanhealth. TACs includeboth organic andinorganic chemical substances thatmay be emitted from a variety of common sources including gasolinestations,motorvehicles,drycleaners,industrialoperations,paintingoperations,andresearchandteachingfacilities.TACsaredifferent than “criteria”pollutants in that ambient airquality standardshavenotbeenestablishedforTACs,largelybecausetherearehundredsofairtoxics,andtheireffectsonhealthtendtobefeltonalocalscaleratherthanonaregionalbasis.

In 1998, The California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA) identified diesel exhaust particulatematter(DPM)asatoxicaircontaminantbasedonitspotentialtocausecancer,prematuredeath,andotherhealthproblems.ThegreatestpotentialforTACemissionsduringconstructionisrelatedtodieselparticulatematteremissionsassociatedwithheavy‐dutyequipment.Duringlong‐termoperations,sourcesofDPMmayincludeheavydutydieseltrucksandstationaryemergencygenerators.

The City of Los Angeles Planning Commission has considered implications of living in close proximity tofreeways. At the requestof thePlanningCommission,Planning staffpreparedanadvisorynotice to alertapplicants toconsiderpublichealth implicationsof freeway‐adjacentprojects.4 Inpreparing thisadvisorynotice, Planning staff has research and studies documenting health impacts to occupants living and/orworkingnearfreeways.Basedonthelinkbetweenhealthimpactsanddistancefromfreeways,theadvisorynoticeprovidesrecommendedbufferdistancestoprotectnewsensitiveusesplacednearfreeways.

As part of this advisory notice, the City Planning Commission advises that projects requiring an EIR andwhich place sensitive receptors in close proximity (1,000 feet) to a freeway perform a Health RiskAssessment(HRA)asasupplementaltechnicalreport.TheresultsoftheHRAwouldprovideinformationtotheCityandapplicantregardinghealthimpactsandallowtheapplicanttomakeaninformeddecisionaboutsiteplanninganddesign.TheCommissionmayalsoconsiderrequirementsincludingenhancedfiltrationoradjustmentstobuildingorientation,operablewindowsandscreeningwithvegetation.

4 AdvisoryNoticetoApplicants–AddendumtoJanuary26,2012Report.LosAngelesCityPlanningCommission.October2012.

2.0 REgulations and Significance Thresholds October 2015


In order to determine the Project’s consistency with the City’s Advisory Notice for Freeway‐Adjacentprojects and CARB’s recommendations, an HRA was prepared to assess the consistency of the proposedsitingofnewresidential landuses inproximity to theHollywood freeway,asubstantialexistingsourceofTACs. TheHRAWorksheets, included inAppendixAof thisTechnicalReport,evaluate thechroniccancerrisk and health effects of TACs associated with diesel‐powered trucks emitting diesel particulate matter(DPM)alongtheHollywoodFreeway,inproximitytopotentialresidentsoftheProject.

AlthoughtheCity’sAdvisoryNoticedoesnotestablishsignificancethresholds,theCityofLosAngelesCEQAThresholdsGuideandtheSCAQMDhasestablishedthatasignificantimpactwouldoccuriftheprojectwouldexposesensitivereceptorstotoxicaircontaminantsresultinginanincrementalcancerriskimpactgreaterorequalto10inonemillion.


3.0 METHODOLOGY

3.1 SOURCE IDENTIFICATION (HOLLYWOOD FREEWAY)

TheCaliforniaDepartmentofTransportation(Caltrans)PerformanceMeasurementSystem(PeMS)collectsandmaintainstrafficvolumecountsforvehiclestraversingtheCaliforniastatehighwaysystem.Consistentwith SCAQMD recommendations, the roadway segment lengths analyzed in this study were determinedbasedonfreewaysegmentslocatedwithinanapproximate0.25‐mileradiusoftheProjectSiteboundaries.As shown in Figure 2, Source Receptor Diagram, a 0.25 mile radius was selected based on SCAQMDrecommendations for sitingsourcesof toxics in relation tosensitive receptors (schools, residentialuses).5Table1,FreewayandRampTrafficVolumes,presentstheannualaveragedailytrafficvolumes(AADT)andpeakhourtrafficvolumesforthefreewaysegmentsconsideredinthisassessment.

3.2 EMISSIONS CALCULATIONS (HOLLYWOOD FREEWAY)

Vehicle traffic and speeddatawasobtained from theCaltransPeMSdatabase for theUS‐101mainline, aswellason‐andoff‐rampswithinaquartermileofthesite.VehicletrafficdataforYear2014wasobtainedforthesegmentoftheUS‐101mainlinewithin0.25mileofthesite.Hourlytrafficdatawasalsoobtainedtoaccountfortemporalvariationoftraffic flow. Anannualtrafficgrowthrateofonepercentwasappliedtoaccountforfuturetrafficflow.

Emission factorswere obtained from the CARBEMFAC2014 emissionsmodel. EMFACwas run for 2018through2047toidentifytheaverageDPMemissionfactorsfromheavy‐dutydieseltruckstypicaloftheUS‐101 over the lifetime of the project’s operations. Vehicle emission factors were calculated assumingexposuredurationof30years.Vehicleemissionswerethencalculatedforeachyearfrom2018(theyearofProject buildout and occupancy) through 2047 based on average traffic flow and vehicle speed along thestudysegment. Certainvehicleweight classes thatdonot travel along the101Freeway (i.e. agricultural)wereremovedfromtheaverageDPMemissionfactorcalculation.

5 AirQualityIssuesinSchoolSiteSelection,SouthCoastAirQualityManagementDistrict,June2005.

Table 1

Freeway and Ramp Traffic Volumes

Sources/Freeway Segment Post Mile AADT Peak Hour

Freeway‐MainSegment1.US101FreewayNorth&South(0.51miles) 7.72 217,000 12,000

Ramps2.US101North&SouthFreewayOn‐RampfromHollywoodBoulevard(0.10miles)

7.85 18,500 770

3.US101North&SouthFreewayOff‐RamptoHollywoodBoulevard(0.14miles)

7.71 14,600 600

Source: California Department of Transportation; pems.dot.ca.gov; http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/traffops/saferesr/trafdata/;2015.

3.0 Methodology October 2015


3.3 DISPERSION MODELING (HOLLYWOOD FREEWAY)

Dispersion modeling was performed using the AMS/EPA Regulatory Model (AERMOD), version 14134.Meteorologicaldata from theSCAQMD’sDowntownLAmonitoring stationwithinSourceReceptorArea1wasusedtorepresentlocalweatherconditionsandprevailingwindsdata.TerraindatafromU.S.GeologicalSurvey(USGS)wasusedtoassignelevationstosourcesandmodelingreceptors.

For modeling purposes, receptors were located on the Project Site at ground level and at two differentheightstoestimateconcentrationsatbalconiesandwindowsthatfacethefreewayandwithintheproposedbuilding’sinteriorcourtyard.Receptorswerealsoplacedattheroofleveltoaccountforresidentsutilizingthe building’s rooftop amenities. The dispersion modeling took into account variable traffic volumes atdifferenttimesofday.HourlyemissionsforfreewaysourceswerecalculatedusinghourlyPeMStrafficdatawithcorrespondingemissionfactorsbasedonhourlymeanspeeddata. Off‐sitesourceswereaddedtothemodel for equipmentwith active permitswithin 500 feet of the Project Site boundary. Permits that are“active” indicatea facilityorsourcethat iscurrentlyallowedtoemitpollutants inaccordancewithpermitconditions.Ascalaremissionrate(1g/s)wasusedforallsourcesforlaterinputintotheHotspotsAnalysisandReportingProgram(HARP).

3.4 CANCER RISK AND HEALTH RISK CALCULATIONS (HOLLYWOOD FREEWAY)

Cancerriskwascalculatedusing theCARB’smostrecentversionofHARP(version2)whichwasreleasedMarch 2015. This version of HARP incorporates themost recent Office of Environmental Health HazardAssessment(OEHHA)guidelinesforhealthriskassessments.Theexposuredurationwasassumedtobe30years and exposurewas based on default values provided by OEHHA andwithin HARP (which has beenupdatedtoaccountforthemostrecentOEHHAguidelinesforhealthriskassessments).

Inperforminghealthriskcalculations,carcinogeniccompoundsarenotconsideredtohavethresholdlevels(i.e.,doselevelsbelowwhichtherearenorisks). Anyexposure,therefore,willhavesomeassociatedrisk.Incremental health risks associated with exposure to carcinogenic compounds is defined in terms of theprobability of developing cancer as a result of exposure to a chemical at a given concentration. Under adeterministic approach (i.e., point estimate methodology), the cancer risk probability is determined bymultiplyingthechemical’sannualconcentrationbyitsunitriskfactor(URF). TheURFisameasureofthecarcinogenicpotentialofachemicalwhenadoseisreceivedthroughtheinhalationpathway.Itrepresentsanupperboundestimateof theprobabilityofcontractingcancerasaresultofcontinuousexposure toanambientconcentrationofonemicrogrampercubicmeter(µg/m3)overa70‐yearlifetime.TheURFsutilizedin the assessment and the corresponding cancer potency factors (CPF) were obtained principally fromOEHHAGuidance.

Fortheinhalationpathway,thecancerriskcharacterizationprocedurerequirestheincorporationofseveraldiscrete variables to effectively quantify dose. Once determined, contaminant dose is multiplied by thecancer potency factor (CPF) in units of inverse dose expressed in milligrams per kilogram per day(mg/kg/day)‐1andotherexposurefactorstoderivethecancerriskestimate.Therefore,toaccommodatetheuniqueexposuresassociatedwiththeproposedpopulation,thefollowingdosealgorithmwasutilized.

FIGURESource Receptor Diagram

5750 Hollywood Boulevard Project 2Source: PCR Services Corpora on, 2015.

P C R

N

October 2015 3.0 Methodology


CDI=(CAIR×{BR/BW}×A×EF)

Where: CDI = Chronicdailyintake(mg/kg/day); CAIR = Concentrationofcontaminantinair(mg/m3); {BR/BW} = DailyBreathingRatenormalizedtobodyweight(l/kgbodyweight‐day); EF = Exposurefrequency(days/year); A = Inhalationabsorptionfactor(unitless).

OEHHArecommendeddefaultvalues for theparameters listedabovewereused in theHRAanalysis. Thedailybreathing rate {BR/BW}used in the analysiswasbasedonwasbasedonOEHHArecommendationswhichvarydependingonagewhichareshowninTable2,OEHHARecommendedResidentialDailyBreathingRatesforPointEstimateDoseCalculations(L/kgbodyweight). Therecommendedexposurefrequency(EF)is350daysperyearwhich isequivalent to0.96(350days/365daysayear). The inhalationabsorptionfactor(A)isassumedtobe1forinhalationbasedriskassessment.6

Oncedoseiscalculated,cancerriskiscalculatedbyaccountingforcancerpotencyofthespecificpollutant,agesensitivity,exposureduration,averagingtimeforlifetimecancerrisk,andfractionoftimespentathome(sensitive receptor). The Cancer Potency Factor (CPF) is specific for each pollutant and is determinedthroughpeerreviewedscientificstudies.OEHHAhasdeterminedthatDieselparticulatematter(DPM)hasaunitriskfactorof3.0E‐4(ug/m3)‐1andaslopefactorof1.1(mg/kg‐day)‐1.7TheAgeSensitivityFactor(ASF)accountsforgreatersusceptibilityinearlylife,startingfromthe3rdtrimesterofpregnancyto70years.Thefraction of time at home (FAH) takes into account the time actually residing at the sensitive receptorlocation. Fraction of time at home also takes into account time spent at time for various age groups.Exposuredurationforpurposesofthishealthriskassessmentwasassumedtobe30years,consistentwithOEHHArecommendationsforresidentialuses.

Asshownintheequationbelow,theincrementalincreaseincancerriskistheproductofthedoseandthepollutant‐specificCPF,ASF,ED,andFAHvalues.Cancerriskiscalculatedbymultiplyingtheinhalationdoseby the inhalation cancer potency factor to yield thepotential inhalation excess cancer risk. The followingequationillustratestheformulaforcalculatingcancerrisk.Toconvertthisriskvaluetochancespermillionofdevelopingcancer,thepotentialcancerriskismultipliedby106.

6 OEHHA,AirToxicsHotSpotsProgramGuidanceManualforPreparationofHealthRiskAssessments,(August2003)5‐16.7 OEHHAHotSpotsUnitRiskandCancerPotencyFactors.May2009.

Table 2

OEHHA Recommended Residential Daily Breathing Rates for Point Estimate Dose Calculations (L / kg body weight)

3rd Trimester 0<2 Years 2<9 Years 2<16 Years 16<30 Years

Average 225 658 535 452 21095thPercentile 361 1090 861 745 335

Source: OEHHA Air Toxics Hot Spots Program Guidance Manual. February 2015.



CancerRisk=Dose(mg/kg‐day)×CPF(mg/kg‐day)‐1xASFxED/ATxFAH

Where: Dose = Amountofaspecificpollutantapersonisexposedto(mg/kg‐day) CPF = CancerPotencyFactor,thecancerpotencyofaspecificpollutant(mg/kg‐day)‐1 ASF = AgeSensitivityFactor(unitless)

ED/AT = ExposureDuration,howlongapersonwillbeexposedtoaspecificpollutantintheirlifetime (years)/Averaging Time, length of time over which the average dose iscalculated(days)

FAH = Fractionoftimeathome(unitless)

Asindicatedintheequationabove,eachagegrouphasdifferentexposureparameterswhichrequirecancerrisk to be calculated separately for each age group. FAH values are presented in Table 3, OEHHARecommendationsforFractionofTimeatHome(FAH)forEvaluatingResidentialCancerRisk.

Table 3

OEHHA Recommendations for Fraction of Time at Home (FAH) for Evaluating Residential Cancer Risk

Age Range Fraction of Time at Residence

3rdTrimesterand0<2Years 0.852<16Years 0.7216‐70Years 0.73

Source: OEHHA Air Toxics Hot Spots Program Guidance Manual. February 2015.


4.0 IMPACT ANALYSIS

Health risk impacts (cancer risk) were assessed for future on‐site residents. Table 4, Summary ofCarcinogenic Risks for On‐Site Sensitive Receptors, summarizes the carcinogenic risk for representativereceptorslocatedthroughouttheSite.Forcarcinogenicexposures,thecancerriskfromDPMemissionsfortheProjectSiteresulted inamaximumcarcinogenicriskof6.8peronemillion for the30‐yearresidentialexposurescenario. Thisscenarioisbasedonahighlyconservative30‐year,24‐hours‐per‐day,seven‐days‐per‐weekexposure.The30‐yearlifetimeexposureisadefaultassumptionunderOEHHAguidelineswhichtakes into account early life (infant and children) exposure. Cancer risk for on‐Site receptorswhich arefurther away from the freewaywoulddrop to2.0peronemillion. It shouldbenoted that the calculatedcancer risk assumes no mitigation such as mechanical filtration and exposure with windows open. Thecurrent City of Los Angeles Building Code requires mechanical filtration with a Minimum EfficiencyReportingValue(MERV)of11orhigher.ThiswouldreducetypicalindoorPM10concentrationsbyatleast85percent. Therefore,actualcancerriskimpactstoon‐siteresidentswouldbelowerthanthosereportedabove.

The HRA worksheets (provided in Appendix) provide a detailed breakdown of these calculations. Insummary,theProjectSite’sworst‐caselocationwouldnotbeexposedtocancerriskinexcessoftheSCAQMDsignificance threshold of 10 per onemillion. As a result, on‐Site residential uses would be provided anadequate health‐based separation distance from the freeway and impactswould be considered less thansignificant.

Table 4

Summary of Carcinogenic Risks for On‐site Sensitive Receptors

Risk Scenario Carcinogenic Risk Per One Million*

MaximumExposedIndividual(MEI)(closesttofreeway)

6.8

MiddleoftheSite 2.5SoutheastCorneroftheSite 2.0

SeecalculationworksheetspresentedinAppendix.*Thesignificancethresholdis10permillion.Source:PCRServicesCorporation,2015


5.0 SUMMARY OF RESULTS

Basedonanexposuredurationof30years,health risk impacts toon‐site residentsdue toTACemissionsfromthe101 freewaywouldbe less thansignificantandnomitigationmeasuresare required. Receptorslocated farther away from the freewaywould result in a smaller cancer risk impact. The project wouldcomplywiththeCityofLosAngelesGreenBuildingCodewhichrequiresMERV11filtration,wouldreduceindoorexposuretoTACemissions.

In summary, the Project Site’s worst‐case location would not be exposed to cancer risk in excess of theSCAQMDsignificancethresholdof10peronemillion.Asaresult,On‐Siteresidentialuseswouldbeprovidedanadequatehealth‐basedseparationdistancefromthefreewayandimpactswouldbeconsideredlessthansignificant. The project would also be consistentwith recommendations provided in the City’s AdvisoryNoticeforFreeway‐AdjacentProjects.

5750HollywoodBoulevardProject HealthRiskAssessmentTechnicalReportPCRServicesCorporation

APPENDIX A HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT WORKSHEETS AND OUTPUT FILES

5750HollywoodHealthRiskAssessmentTechnicalReportAppendixA,HealthRiskAssessmentWorksheetsandOutputFilesA.1 EmissionsInventory

A.2 AERMODDispersionModeling

A.3 HARPOutputFiles

AppendixA.1EmissionsInventory

5750 Hollywood101 Freeway Health Risk Assessment

Emissions Inventory5750 Hollywood Blvd. Health Risk AssessmentEmissions Inventory ‐ Annual (2018‐2048)

Vehicle Mix Ramps

% Light Duty Vehicle Growth Rate 1% per year

99% * 5750 Hollywood Blvd. Traffic Study% Heavy Duty Trucks

1%

Roadway Road Segment Year Year ID Truck Flow (vehicles/yr) Length (mile) Speed (mph) Diesel EF

(g/mi)PM10 Emissions

(lbs/yr)Mainline Northbound Mainline 2018 2 448,709 0.51 60 0.038 19Mainline Southbound Mainline 2018 2 1,254,808 0.51 55 0.035 50Ramp Northbound On-Ramp 2018 2 40,519 0.10 5 0.090 1Ramp Northbound Off-Ramp 2018 2 27,744 0.14 5 0.090 1Ramp Southbound On-Ramp 2018 2 27,014 0.10 5 0.090 1Ramp Southbound Off-Ramp 2018 2 25,554 0.14 5 0.090 1

Mainline Northbound Mainline 2019 3 453,196 0.51 60 0.033 16Mainline Southbound Mainline 2019 3 1,267,356 0.51 55 0.031 44Ramp Northbound On-Ramp 2019 3 40,924 0.10 5 0.076 1Ramp Northbound Off-Ramp 2019 3 28,021 0.14 5 0.076 1Ramp Southbound On-Ramp 2019 3 27,284 0.10 5 0.076 0Ramp Southbound Off-Ramp 2019 3 25,809 0.14 5 0.076 1







Annual Emissions (EMFAC2014)_042715.xlsx Page 1 of 4 3:04 PM 9/24/2015



Vehicle Mix Ramps



1%













Emissions Inventory ‐ Summary

5750 Hollywood Blvd. Health Risk AssessmentEmissions Inventory Summary ‐ Annual (2018‐2048)

Year Mainline (lbs/year)

Ramp (lbs/year)

2018 69 2.82019 60 2.42020 48 1.72021 32 1.42022 28 1.22023 20 0.92024 19 0.82025 18 0.82026 17 0.72027 16 0.72028 15 0.62029 14 0.62030 14 0.62031 13 0.52032 12 0.52033 12 0.52034 11 0.52035 11 0.42036 10 0.42037 10 0.42038 10 0.42039 10 0.42040 10 0.42041 10 0.42042 10 0.42043 10 0.42044 10 0.42045 10 0.42046 11 0.42047 11 0.4

Average 18.4 0.7

Totals / Average

Annual Emissions (EMFAC2014)_042715.xlsx Page 1 of 1 3:08 PM9/24/2015

AppendixA.2AERMODDispersionModeling

5750 Hollywood Blvd. Health Risk AssessmentAERMOD Input ‐ Variable Hourly Emissions

Segment Time Length (m) Truck Flow (vehicle/hr) Speed (mph) Diesel EF (g/mi)DPM Emissions

(g/s) DPM ScalarMainline 12:00:00 AM 816 130 65 0.039 7.07E-04 0.7

1:00:00 AM 816 110 65 0.039 5.99E-04 0.62:00:00 AM 816 109 65 0.039 5.91E-04 0.63:00:00 AM 816 106 65 0.039 5.77E-04 0.64:00:00 AM 816 125 70 0.040 6.97E-04 0.75:00:00 AM 816 160 70 0.040 8.95E-04 0.96:00:00 AM 816 172 65 0.039 9.35E-04 0.97:00:00 AM 816 178 60 0.038 9.44E-04 1.08:00:00 AM 816 202 55 0.035 1.01E-03 1.09:00:00 AM 816 214 55 0.035 1.07E-03 1.1

10:00:00 AM 816 241 60 0.038 1.27E-03 1.311:00:00 AM 816 251 55 0.035 1.26E-03 1.312:00:00 PM 816 250 60 0.038 1.32E-03 1.3

1:00:00 PM 816 251 55 0.035 1.25E-03 1.32:00:00 PM 816 253 55 0.035 1.26E-03 1.33:00:00 PM 816 254 40 0.031 1.12E-03 1.14:00:00 PM 816 250 35 0.032 1.14E-03 1.25:00:00 PM 816 251 30 0.035 1.22E-03 1.26:00:00 PM 816 266 35 0.032 1.21E-03 1.27:00:00 PM 816 232 45 0.032 1.03E-03 1.08:00:00 PM 816 174 60 0.038 9.19E-04 0.99:00:00 PM 816 163 65 0.039 8.82E-04 0.9

10:00:00 PM 816 164 65 0.039 8.89E-04 0.911:00:00 PM 816 164 65 0.039 8.89E-04 0.9

9.87E-04Average Hourly

AERMOD View - Lakes Environmental Software C:\ISC Runs\5750 Revised (052815)\5750 Revised_emission rates.isc

SCALE:

0 0.2 km

1:5,408

PROJECT TITLE:


COMMENTS:

Source Receptor Configuration

COMPANY NAME:

MODELER:

DATE:

9/24/2015

PROJECT NO.:

5750 Hollywood Blvd.

SOURCES:

3

RECEPTORS:

57

AppendixA.3HARPOutputFiles


Health Risk Calculations5750 Hollywood101 Freeway Health Risk AssessmentCancer Risk Calculations (HARP Output)

Receptor No. X Y

Diesel Particulate Matter Concentration

(ug/m3) Cancer Risk SCENARIO1 378657.93 3774194 0.00774447 5.28E‐06 30YrCancerDerived2 378672.49 3774148.57 0.008464497 5.77E‐06 30YrCancerDerived3 378683.01 3774148.49 0.007543787 5.14E‐06 30YrCancerDerived4 378690.27 3774148.38 0.007023436 4.79E‐06 30YrCancerDerived5 378696.88 3774148.38 0.006601566 4.50E‐06 30YrCancerDerived6 378704.1 3774148.28 0.006186491 4.22E‐06 30YrCancerDerived7 378711.86 3774148.2 0.005802036 3.96E‐06 30YrCancerDerived8 378658.02 3774186.97 0.008053429 5.49E‐06 30YrCancerDerived9 378658.11 3774181.51 0.008313716 5.67E‐06 30YrCancerDerived10 378657.84 3774174.63 0.008694299 5.93E‐06 30YrCancerDerived11 378657.58 3774150.75 0.0101741 6.94E‐06 30YrCancerDerived12 378677.14 3774172.08 0.00714783 4.87E‐06 30YrCancerDerived13 378685.07 3774171.81 0.00663573 4.52E‐06 30YrCancerDerived14 378697.58 3774171.2 0.005965656 4.07E‐06 30YrCancerDerived15 378712.3 3774170.84 0.005319811 3.63E‐06 30YrCancerDerived16 378726.4 3774170.31 0.004818656 3.29E‐06 30YrCancerDerived17 378685.16 3774181.51 0.006345826 4.33E‐06 30YrCancerDerived18 378699.87 3774180.54 0.005643503 3.85E‐06 30YrCancerDerived19 378715.38 3774179.3 0.005046809 3.44E‐06 30YrCancerDerived20 378657.93 3774194 0.006080178 4.15E‐06 30YrCancerDerived21 378672.49 3774148.57 0.006561471 4.47E‐06 30YrCancerDerived22 378683.01 3774148.49 0.005886029 4.01E‐06 30YrCancerDerived23 378690.27 3774148.38 0.005493931 3.75E‐06 30YrCancerDerived24 378696.88 3774148.38 0.005175687 3.53E‐06 30YrCancerDerived25 378704.1 3774148.28 0.004875215 3.32E‐06 30YrCancerDerived26 378711.86 3774148.2 0.004622942 3.15E‐06 30YrCancerDerived27 378658.02 3774186.97 0.006308778 4.30E‐06 30YrCancerDerived28 378658.11 3774181.51 0.006490586 4.43E‐06 30YrCancerDerived29 378657.84 3774174.63 0.006752864 4.60E‐06 30YrCancerDerived30 378657.58 3774150.75 0.007738314 5.28E‐06 30YrCancerDerived31 378677.14 3774172.08 0.005691945 3.88E‐06 30YrCancerDerived32 378685.07 3774171.81 0.005327833 3.63E‐06 30YrCancerDerived33 378697.58 3774171.2 0.004837229 3.30E‐06 30YrCancerDerived34 378712.3 3774170.84 0.004378082 2.99E‐06 30YrCancerDerived35 378726.4 3774170.31 0.004022564 2.74E‐06 30YrCancerDerived36 378685.16 3774181.51 0.005151094 3.51E‐06 30YrCancerDerived37 378699.87 3774180.54 0.004640318 3.16E‐06 30YrCancerDerived38 378715.38 3774179.3 0.004214853 2.87E‐06 30YrCancerDerived39 378657.93 3774194 0.004660404 3.18E‐06 30YrCancerDerived

UTM Coordinates

CancerRisk (Formatted for Appendix).xlsx Page 1 of 2 3:17 PM 9/24/2015


Health Risk Calculations5750 Hollywood101 Freeway Health Risk AssessmentCancer Risk Calculations (HARP Output)

Receptor No. X Y

Diesel Particulate Matter Concentration

(ug/m3) Cancer Risk SCENARIO

UTM Coordinates

40 378672.49 3774148.57 0.00498275 3.40E‐06 30YrCancerDerived41 378683.01 3774148.49 0.004503039 3.07E‐06 30YrCancerDerived42 378690.27 3774148.38 0.004224929 2.88E‐06 30YrCancerDerived43 378696.88 3774148.38 0.003999074 2.73E‐06 30YrCancerDerived44 378704.1 3774148.28 0.003782128 2.58E‐06 30YrCancerDerived45 378711.86 3774148.2 0.003583902 2.44E‐06 30YrCancerDerived46 378658.02 3774186.97 0.004818327 3.29E‐06 30YrCancerDerived47 378658.11 3774181.51 0.004944039 3.37E‐06 30YrCancerDerived48 378657.84 3774174.63 0.005127952 3.50E‐06 30YrCancerDerived49 378657.58 3774150.75 0.005825215 3.97E‐06 30YrCancerDerived50 378677.14 3774172.08 0.00433769 2.96E‐06 30YrCancerDerived51 378685.07 3774171.81 0.004070219 2.78E‐06 30YrCancerDerived52 378697.58 3774171.2 0.003711878 2.53E‐06 30YrCancerDerived53 378712.3 3774170.84 0.003366965 2.30E‐06 30YrCancerDerived54 378726.4 3774170.31 0.003096604 2.11E‐06 30YrCancerDerived55 378685.16 3774181.51 0.003934318 2.68E‐06 30YrCancerDerived56 378699.87 3774180.54 0.003555404 2.42E‐06 30YrCancerDerived57 378715.38 3774179.3 0.003234297 2.21E‐06 30YrCancerDerived

CancerRisk (Formatted for Appendix).xlsx Page 2 of 2 3:17 PM 9/24/2015

OutputHARP2 - HRACalc (dated 15065) 5/5/2015 3:31:39 PM - Output Log

GLCs loaded successfullyPollutants loaded successfullyPathway receptors loaded successfully**********************************Start Age: -0.25Total Exposure Duration: 30

**********************************Exposure Duration Bin Distribution3rd Trimester Bin: 0.250<2 Years Bin: 22<9 Years Bin: 02<16 Years Bin: 1416<30 Years Bin: 1416 to 70 Years Bin: 0

**********************************Pathways EnabledInhalation: TrueSoil: FalseDermal: FalseMother's Milk: FalseWater: FalseFish: FalseHomegrown Crops: FalseBeef: FalseDairy: FalsePig: FalseChicken: FalseEgg: False

Calculating cancer riskCancer risk saved to: C:\HARP2\Project\5750_01\hra\CancerRisk.csvHRA ran successfully

Page 1

appendix e health risk assessment technical report...5750 hollywood boulevard project health risk...

Documents